Sociolinguistic Competence and Interpreting Variable Structures in a Second Language

Abstract

Learners must develop the ability to vary language according to linguistic and situational factors to produce context-appropriate utterances. Likewise, interpreting the additional meaning conveyed through language variation is essential for successful communication. Nevertheless, research on the interpretation of the variable copulas in Spanish is scarce and we do not know how individual lexical items and patterns of co-occurrence of adjectives with particular copulas influence interpretation. Addressing this void, we compare interpretation of the copulas by native speakers and highly advanced, advanced, and intermediate learners. Participants completed an interpretation task containing the copulas paired with one of nine adjectives, categorized as typically co-occurring with ser, estar, or both copulas. The current study contributes to the body of work on communicative competence and advanced L2 proficiency by exploring the development of interpretative abilities of English-speaking learners of Spanish and the extent to which interpretation differs across adjective classes and individual adjectives.

Implicit Causality and Consequentiality and Effect of Pronoun Resolution/Quality of Use among EFL Learners

“…Since intentionality explains the IR and IC biases, implying that the two are attributed to causal inferences, it is vital for the current study to explore whether intentionality affects IR and IC biases (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020). The use of pronouns, based on the IC biases, is best understood by taking into consideration how intentional events are explained by the agent-specific reasons, hence, explaining the same intentional behaviours or event begins by referring to the agent (the pronoun), and as the agent will he appearing within an active sentence.…”

“…On the other hand, unintentional events are explained through causes which may be external or internal, then explanations directed at the unintentional event will not show a referential bias towards the agent (Niemi, Hartshorne, Gerstenberg, & Young, 2016). The situation has been reported as different for the IR biases (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020). Based on the folk concept of intentionality, an intentional behaviour is subject to the desire of an agent for a particular outcome (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020).…”

“…The situation has been reported as different for the IR biases (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020). Based on the folk concept of intentionality, an intentional behaviour is subject to the desire of an agent for a particular outcome (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020). Hence, with interpersonal events involving patient and agent, the outcome is attributed to the patient.…”

“…In this case, an agent is driven or influenced by intention to perform an action, of which the agent desires for the patient to be affected by the action for his or her desired action to be realized (Niemi et al, 2016). Once successfully performing the action, the patient becomes the entity by which direct influence is realized and as such, remains the key element of focus for the consequence (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020).…”

“…The gender of those participating in the event equally has a profound influence or implication on re-mentions. For example, it has been noted that men are most likely to re-mention male individuals or pronouns denoting males in comparison to women (Kanwit, &Geeslin, 2020). On the other hand, for the male being re-mentioned, they have been reported to be the most likely to be rementioned in the events associated with negative events like torment, kill, or hit (Niemi et al, 2016).…”